• Hucklebee@lemmy.world
    3·
    21 days ago

    Can someone explain why MacOS always seems to create _MACOSX folders in zips that we Linux/Windows users always delete anyway?

        • Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish
          1·
          21 days ago

          That’s not Linux doing that. It’s the demons in your hardware trying to escape. They normally don’t cause too many issues luckily, but if you don’t close the portals occasionally they can take over your system.

      • ulterno@lemmy.kde.socialEnglish
        11·
        21 days ago

        Yeah, those tend to be pre-folder settings for the File Explorer.
        Like View options, thumbnails and such.

        It’s been a while for me, but I think there was something specially for thumbnails too. You might find one if you go into the folder options and set a folder to optimized for pictures/videos and add some to it.

        Anti Commercial-AI license

    • Hawk@lemmynsfw.com
      1·
      20 days ago

      HFS+ has a different features set than NTFS or ext4, Apple elect to store metadata that way.

      I would imagine modern FS like ZFS or btrfs could benefit from doing something similar but nobody has chosen to implement something like that in that way.

        • Hawk@lemmynsfw.com
          1·
          20 days ago

          I gotcha:

          • Btrfs
            • BTree File System
              • A Copy on White file system that supports snapshots, supported mostly by
          • ZFS
            • Zetabyte File System
              • Copy on Write File System. Less flexible than BTRFS but generally more robust and stable. Better compression in my experience than BTRFS. Out of Kernel Linux support and native FreeBSD.
          • HFS+
            • what Mac uses, I have no clue about this. some Copy on Write stuff.
          • NTFS
            • Windows File System
            • From what I know, no compression or COW
            • In my experience less stable than ext4/ZFS but maybe it’s better nowadays.
  • renzev@lemmy.world
    3·
    22 days ago

    Obligatory shilling for unar, I love that little fucker so much

    • Single command to handle uncompressing nearly all formats.
    • No obscure flags to remember, just unar <yourfile>
    • Makes sure output is always contained in a directory
    • Correctly handles weird japanese zip files with SHIFT-JIS filename encoding, even when standard unzip doesn’t
      • renzev@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        21 days ago

        Voicebanks for Utau (free (as in beer, iirc) clone of Vocaloid) are primarily distributed as SHIFT-JIS encoded zips. For example, try downloading Yufu Sekka’s voicebank: http://sekkayufu.web.fc2.com/ . If I try to unzip the “full set” zip, it produces a folder called РсЙ╠ГЖГtТPУ╞Й╣ГtГЛГZГbГgБi111025Бj. But unar detects the encoding and properly extracts it as 雪歌ユフ単独音フルセット（111025). I’m sure there’s some flag you can pass to unzip to specify the encoding, but I like having unar handle it for me automatically.

        • sh__@lemmy.world
          0·
          21 days ago

          Ah, that’s pretty cool. I’m not sure I know of that program. I do know a little vocaloid though, but I only really listen to 稲葉曇(Inabakumori).

          • renzev@lemmy.worldEnglish
            2·
            19 days ago

            I know inabakumori! Their music is so cool! When I first listened to rainy boots and lagtrain, it made me feel emotions I thought I had forgotten a long time ago… I wish my japanese was good enough to understand the lyrics without looking them up ._. I’m also a huge fan of Kikuo. His music is just something completely unique, not to mention his insane tuning. He makes Miku sing in ways I didn’t think were possible lol

            • sh__@lemmy.world
              2·
              19 days ago

              I get you, I want to learn more Japanese. I only understand a very small amount at this point. I don’t have any Miku songs that I have really wanted to listen to, but that could change. I might check out Kikuo then. Also I love the animations Inabakumori release with their songs too. They have some new stuff that’s really good if you haven’t checked it out yet.

  • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
    2·
    20 days ago

    I still wonder what that’s like. Somebody must still occasionally get a notification that SOMEWHERE somebody paid for their WinRAR license and is like “WOAH WE GOT ANOTHER ONE!”

    Never looked back since 7z though. :D

  • jh29a@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    1·
    21 days ago

    I use .tar.gz in personal backups because it’s built in, and because its the command I could get custom subdirectory exclusion to work on.

  • Emerald@lemmy.world
    1·
    20 days ago

    Can we please just never use proprietary rar ever. We have 7z, tar.gz, and the classic zip

    • Alexstarfire@lemmy.world
      1·
      22 days ago

      You can’t decrease something by more than 100% without going negative. I’m assuming this doesn’t actually decompress files before you tell it to.

      Does this actually decompress in 1/13th the time?

  • frezik@midwest.social
    1·
    22 days ago

    Zip makes different tradeoffs. Its compression is basically the same as gz, but you wouldn’t know it from the file sizes.

    Tar archives everything together, then compresses. The advantage is that there are more patterns available across all the files, so it can be compressed a lot more.

    Zip compresses individual files, then archives. The individual files aren’t going to be compressed as much because they aren’t handling patterns between files. The advantages are that an error early in the file won’t propagate to all the other files after it, and you can read a file in the middle without decompressing everything before it.

    • herrvogel@lemmy.world
      1·
      21 days ago

      Yeah that’s a rather important point that’s conveniently left out too often. I routinely extract individual files out of large archives. Pretty easy and quick with zip, painfully slow and inefficient with (most) tarballs.

  • qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website
    1·
    22 days ago

    When I’m feeling cool and downloading a *.tar* file, I’ll wget to stdout, and tar from stdin. Archive gets extracted on the fly.

    I have (successfully!) written an .iso to CD this way, too (pipe wget to cdrecord). Fun stuff.

  • tal@lemmy.todayEnglish
    1·
    20 days ago

    Compatibility aside, I’d say that .tar.pxz aka .tpxz is probably my vote.

    LZMA is probably what I’d want to use. xz and 7zip use that. It’s a bit slow to compress, but it has good compression ratios, and it’s faster to decompress than bzip2.

    pixz permits for parallel LZMA compression/decompression. On present-day processors with a lot of cores, that’s desirable.

    https://github.com/vasi/pixz

    It also can use .tar as its container format, which is desirable; that’s everywhere.

    The major drawback to .tar is that it doesn’t support indexed access, so extracting a single file isn’t fast, but .tar.pxz does.

  • Eager Eagle@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    22 days ago

    I use the command line every day, but can’t be bothered with all the compression options of tar and company.

    zip -r thing.zip things/ and unzip thing.zip are temptingly more straightforward.

    Need more compression? zip -r -9 thing.zip things/. Need a faster option? Use a smaller digit.

    • nocteb@lemmy.ml
      0·
      22 days ago

      The problem with that is that it will not preserve flags and access rights.